One Law

Re-thinking governance. We only need one law - the Non-Aggression Principle - the foundation of libertarianism - to maximize justice, peace, and prosperity.

Archives for December 2017

by

Chris Christie’s Situational Federalism

Chris Christie’s Situational Federalism

New Jersey’s governor says states have a right to legalize sports betting but not marijuana.

Source: Chris Christie’s Situational Federalism

Situational federalism? I like it! But “arbitrary federalism” may be more accurate.

Because at the end of the day, it’s still a small group of people living off the theft of taxation arbitrarily using force to impose their moral agenda upon others.

Another great reason more folks would appreciate the Non-Aggression Principle; then live it as the rule of law.

Note:  The views expressed are solely the opinion of the author.
Conceptual and title source: reason.com
Media source: reason.com
Image source: reason.com; Jacob Sullum

by

Can States Compel You to Bake a Cake Against Your Will? The Supreme Court Will Decide.

Can States Compel You to Bake a Cake Against Your Will? The Supreme Court Will Decide.

Masterpiece is the first such case to make it to the justices.

Source: Can States Compel You to Bake a Cake Against Your Will? The Supreme Court Will Decide.  By Stephanie Slade at reason.com

Masterpiece exposes another gross example of democracy/federalism gone bad …which always occurs… given sufficient time.

But more specifically, such cases show the limitation of nearly all laws, but especially those which create arbitrary classes and bright-line definitions that eventually reveal substantial uncertainty, create confusion, and then worse, become the basis for legal conclusions that are beyond absurd …like forcing a baker to bake a cake for someone …for whatever reason. And, not to mention, that such laws are not practically enforceable; thus, a waste of resources.

But perhaps most importantly, affirmation of such laws fuels the expansion of the veiled slavery under which virtually all of us live. I can only pray that SCOTUS doesn’t it take itself too seriously, and relieves us of another pseudo-intellectual juggernaut against those who earn their livelihood through mutual consent versus those that feel compelled to enforce this tripe, and can afford to do so only through the force government because there is no economic check on the theft of taxation.

Note:  The views expressed are solely the opinion of the author.
Conceptual and title source: reason.com
Media source: reason.com
Image source: reason.com; Katherine Mangu-Ward